logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.10 2015가단5390895
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer that entered into a factory fire insurance contract (insurance period: from August 27, 2014 to August 27, 2015; hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with respect to the 68th floor factories of reinforced concrete structure (refinite concrete roof) 680, 140, 140, 68, 140, 68, 140, 140, 140, 2005, 200, 200, 200,000,000,000).

B. On February 27, 2015, around 11:30, a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) was caused to the building of the second floor of the steel-frame slive slive roof, owned by the Defendant, located in 19-16, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, 54-gil, Seopo-ro, 19-16, located adjacent to the Plaintiff’s building.

C. In the Gyeonggi Military Police Station and the Military Military Military Fire Station, the fire extinguishing point of this case was examined as part of the high stage of the second floor toilet (Washing room) of the Defendant’s building, and the cause of combustion was examined as “ mechanical factors, heat, and excessive load,” respectively.

On June 4, 2015, the Plaintiff deemed that the Plaintiff’s building was damaged by the burning of the instant fire, and paid insurance proceeds of KRW 20,684,497 to the Nonparty Company.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant fire occurred due to the defect in the construction and preservation of the Defendant’s building, which is a structure, or due to the negligence of the Defendant who neglected the duty to prevent fire, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the damages incurred to the Nonparty’s company caused by the instant fire, pursuant to Article 758(1) of the Civil Act

The plaintiff, as the insurer of the non-party company, can exercise the right to claim damages against the defendant of the non-party company by paying the insurance proceeds as the insurer of the non-party company. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 20,684

3. The judgment of the court below suffered damages from the fire of this case.

arrow